Related Experiment Videos
Litigating a right to treatment: Woe is me
1Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Nassau County Medical Center, New York.
The Psychiatric Quarterly
|January 1, 1988
Summary
The right to treatment, established in 1960, ensures adequate care for involuntarily hospitalized patients. Defining and implementing this right remains a legal challenge, as seen in the Walter Woe case.
Area of Science:
- Legal Medicine
- Public Health Law
- Mental Health Law
Background:
- The right to treatment concept emerged in 1960.
- Its constitutional basis is debated, but it's recognized in legislation and court decisions.
- Challenges persist in defining, implementing, and quantifying this right.
Purpose of the Study:
- To examine the ongoing legal efforts to establish a right to treatment for involuntarily hospitalized patients.
- To analyze the implications of extending the right to treatment to include a precommitment right to refuse inadequate care.
Main Methods:
- Litigation analysis of the Walter Woe case in federal courts.
- Review of state legislation and lower court decisions regarding the right to treatment.
- Legal scholarship on the evolution and application of treatment rights.
Main Results:
- The Walter Woe case exemplifies a decade-long legal battle for equitable care.
- Involuntarily hospitalized patients in the public sector may receive different care levels than voluntary patients.
- A precommitment right to refuse inadequate treatment is a developing legal frontier.
Conclusions:
- The right to treatment, while accepted, remains difficult to define and implement.
- Legal battles like Walter Woe highlight the ongoing struggle for adequate and equitable mental healthcare.
- The concept of a precommitment right to refuse treatment represents a significant, albeit complex, advancement in patient rights.